This is sort of stupidtacular - Roland has introduced the C-30 Digital Harpsichord. It’s also a sign that the technology is getting cheap and good enough to be irrelevant for a lot of types of instruments, so packaging starts making more of a difference.
Description:
Roland’s “click action” F-scale keyboard provides an authentic harpsichord feel, while two different types of unique harpsichord modes give you an expansive selection of sounds including French-type and Flemish-type harpsichord. Each mode has four stop variations: 8′1, (back), 8′11 (front), 4′, and Lute.
In addition, Roland has added totally new sounds with the “Dynamic Harpsichord”, which can be played with dynamics and with a damper pedal. It also features two positive small-pipe organ sounds and the sound of the early fortepiano.
Available tuning options include baroque pitch (415Hz) and Versailles pitch (392Hz), which can be switched instantly without changing the temperament (classical tuning). A total of five tunings are supported. In addition to equal temperament including: Werckmeister, Kirnberger, Vallotti, and Meantone.
It’s possible to adjust the sound to achieve a proper balance when playing in an ensemble with violin, modern flute, or other comparatively loud instruments. On the other hand, if you want to practice at home late at night, you can turn the volume down. You can also practice using headphones.
The C-30 can be split up into unit and stand. You can easily transport the unit (25 kg) and stand (13 kg) in an ordinary car.
The C-30’s unique keyboard lid and side panels can be customized with a variety of patterns including paintings, and stained-glass inspired artwork.
Related Posts
- Roland Intros EXR-46 Oriental Arranger
- NAMM Update: Roland Intros New Juno Stage Synthesizer
- Roland Intros GW-8 Synth Workstation
- NAMM: SR-G01 G-70 Upgrade Kit for Roland G-70
- Roland Intros Retro-Styled Juno-G
18 Responses to “Roland Intros C-30 Digital Harpsichord”
Please Wait
Stupitacular applies more to your comment.
Roland realises, as do the makers of most other floorstanding
musical instruments, that the instrument is also a piece of furniture.
Too often, if little Johnny or Janey don’t want to practice, that is
what a the instrument is for most of its life.
The technology is very relevant, things like effective emulation
of the feel of harpsichord keys, provision of alternative tempering
and other digital advantages are not as immediately attention-
grabbing as angels playing lutes.
The pricing instruments depends to a great extent on
projected sales to recoup R&D costs and the costs of production.
Making instruments that appeal to as many people as possible
is one way of making these superb musical instruments available
to as many people as possible.
There is no particular reason why a digital instrument has to
be made from moulded plastic. Instruments that are essentially
based on samples from acoustic instruments are reproducing
sounds. Why should it be odd that they also emulate the look
of the instruments they sonically resemble? It helps to complete
the illusion.
Without the hassle of tuning, you get several harpsichords and
a piano in a customizable wooden box. I’d say that is cause for
approbation not denigration. If you find the glass or the
keyboard panel lame or distracting, just remove them.
Thanks for your feedback, Mr Tongue.
I’m not sure what your comment about angels playing lutes refers to, though.
Sorry if the post offended you. My point is that synth technology is sufficiently advanced that the packaging is often more important than the technology. Disguising a playback synth as a 300 year-old harpsichord seems both stupid AND spectacularly awesome.
Like you suggested, Roland isn’t just selling a musical instrument, they’re selling something that frequently will be a nice piece of furniture for most of its life.
I should apologise for being, let’s call it,
excessively polemical.
The “Angels playing lutes” refers to the
decorative panel that comes with the C-30.
It displays when you have the keyboard lid up.
There’s also stained glass in the stands.
Luckily, you can remove the cultural bling.
“packaging is often more important than the technology”
is not restricted to synths. I would say that most people
care about looking cool. The moment of truth comes when
you actually have to play. The nice thing about the C-30
is that you don’t have to play in public. Harpsichords are
fickle instruments and have been too expensive for most
people to own. Now you can have one at home and explore
the history of music via switchable dispositions and access
to several different period instruments. With headphones
on, no-one has to hear you at all.
I hadn’t thought of disguise as a concept for this
product. I suppose we are coming at it from different direction.
If you are into synths, then you get a kind of x-ray vision into
the electronics. A consumer who always wanted to try a harpsichord
or wanted an interesting second keyboard, is not going
to be that concerned about anything but the quality of the playing
experience and whether or not it is affordable.
The appearance is part of the playing experience.
Moulded plastic is not probably not going to appeal much to
people are interested in hearing what Kirnberger harmonies
sound like and comparing them to Werckmeister.
You are right that making such an instrument depends on
being completely competent with acquiring libraries of sound
samples of sufficient quality and assigning items to keys. But
there is a little more to it than that.
In the C-30 the mechanical design of keyboard must have
required a great deal of know-how, research, and ingenuity.
There is a knack to designing successful products and keeping
an innovative business going.
In a product designed for music, you would think that sound
and playability are paramount, but as Apple has demonstrated
with the iPod, looks can be more important than sound and
convenience.
The C-30 does not seem to be simply another “playback synth”; it is a niche product that fills a very specific niche. As a harpsichordist who owns an authentic reproduction of a 1685 Italian instrument, I’ve always been frustrated that it constantly goes out of tune, and the so-called “harpsichord” stops I found on every electronic keyboard I ever tried never sounded anything remotely like a real harpsichord. If they can sample a grand piano to make a really good-sounding digital piano, I used to wonder, why they couldn’t do that for a harpsichord, too. In fact, I reasoned, they could offer more than one harpsichord sound (French or Italian or Flemish etc.) and offer different termperaments (since numerous temperaments were used in the 17th and 18th centuries), different pitch standards, different registers (8-foot, 4-foot, 16-foot), the whole works, all in an instrument that would never need tuning and never need to be “revoiced” by having all the plectra replaced periodically. But it always seemed that the harpsichord market was too small for it to be feasible to produce such an instrument. From their description, it sounds like Roland has created very near what I’ve fantacized about. They even (although I’m not sure how successfully) attempted to reproduce the feel of a harpsichord keyboard, which is unlike any other keyboard because you can actually feel the strings being plucked as you play. I have no interest in having the capability to reproduce the sounds of saxophones or trombones or a wordless chorus or any of the other sounds common to most synthesizers, and I suspect most other harpsichordists feel the same way. I have not yet had the opportunity to try the Roland C-30, and to tell the truth I’m not overjoyed by the visual design of it (it doesn’t look like a harpsichord, and who cares about stained-glass inserts, etc.), but if it comes anywhere near matching the description, I will certainly buy one. It isn’t stupid; it’s a fantastic idea whose time has come.
Be forewarned:
In 1988 Roland released their C-50 and C-80 Digital Harpsichords. I bought a C-50 in May 1988. Just beyond one octave above middle C, the keys in the range of E-A or so, in one of the 8′ registers, were mis-sampled. The result was that a distorted or static-like sound would occur after a fraction of a second when holding the keys down. In the words of a Roland technician whom I spoke to on the phone while he had my C-50 right in front of him, there was a “sampling error”, and as the sampling error was built into the original design, nothing could be done about it. In other words, it was not specific to my C-50, but to all of them. The C-80 also contained the same electronics as the C-50, but with a higher level sound system and cabinet, therefore, the C-80 would have also exhibited this problem.
The new C-30 contains the exact same voicing as the older models. I believe it is fair to assume that Roland has not corrected this problem, they might not even be aware of it. However, any potential buyer of the C-30 needs to be aware of this. That particular register was, for me, as good as unplayable, and therefore rendered my C-50 useless.
As far as realistic tonal response is concerned, that’s a subjective analysis. The basses were pretty good, the treble range seemed to lack something.
Caviat emptor: Try before you buy. If you can’t try it first, make sure you can return it.
I own a C-30 since a few days and I am impressed. This digital instrument can´t replace a real acoustic harpsichord but it is perfect to practise in a small room. I´m a music student (organ and conducting) and it´s very nice to have such a instrument near my desktop. This C-30 replaced my Clavinova and for my use it is a great deal because of the “click” - keyboard which is definitvely nearer to organ an harpsichord feeling than the heavy piano keyboard of a digital piano. The sound isn´t really important for me, but it is even very good! I can´t find the “sampling error” Jack mentioned above. The poissibility to change between old temperatures is great.
The C-30 is a perfect choice for students.
Jack is back. I just saw a demo of the new Roland C-30 Digital Harpsichord on Youtube. I’m impressed. Close your eyes, and it sounds like the real thing. My previous blurb here entitled ” Be forewarned” regarding the previous Roland C-50 still stands, please read it. If Josef’s (see his review also) did not have that sampling error, I’m glad to hear that. The new C-30 now has French and Flemish sound samples, so maybe they resampled the whole thing.
I’ve seen the C-30 priced at $4000 and also at $5000 online. So just make sure you can get your $ back.
I would be very interested to hear if anyone has been able to compare the new C-30 with the older C-20 and C-50 digital harpsichords. I have a C-20 and am wondering how much of an improvement the C-30 would represent and whether or not it would be worth buying. The different touch does seem interesting, and the sound of the samples on the Roland website is also quite nice, but it would be nice to hear from someone who has actually played the new model and also is familiar with the earlier ones.
You can hear the sound of the C-30 here.
Even you can compare with the original beautiful French harpsichord audio demo which they sampled ( Branshet II Paris 1765 ).
http://www.roland.com/classic/c30/concert/index.html
Also, you can check all the internal sound of the C-30 such as Fortepiano, Pipe organ, Celesta, etc.
http://www.roland.com/classic/c30/features/hear.html
Today I tried out a C-30 for two hours. Contrary to observations given above, I hear no imbalance in the sampling of any of the “stops.” All sounds very even. The key widths mirror those of other Rolands which will suit keyboard players generally though not those who play hand-built intruments. The sharps sensibly are matt finish. However in contrast, the naturals are highly polished causing fingers easily to slide off unless carefully placed. This contrasts dramatically with the grained key surfaces of Roland stage pianos. So, those with sweaty fingers beware!
Some thoughts from a harpsichord enthusiast.
Unlike professionals who posted very relevant and interesting comments in this forum I am amteur pianist, play the organ from time to time and played a real harpsichord not more often than twice in my life. Originally I was looking for a digital church organ for my living room and when I found this instumrnet by chance this morning got somehow enthusiastic about it. This is also becuase I have had the wish to own a harpsichord for years.
In the end what I think about this instrument and what the whole thing boils down to for me is:
Major advantages:
- cheap to buy
- no maintenance, no tuning, no being afraid of cracks in the wood
- easy to move
- quality of sounds and material seem good (from the demos I saw and from what I read here)
- can play different kinds of harpsichords in different tunings and change within seconds
- MIDI to play any sound I want on the keyboard
- click action keyboard for realistic feeling
major disadvantage (and what I really do not understand about this instrument):
- Roland tries to imitate the sound of the baroque ages in all its facets (different regional makes, different tunings)
- Roland puts this kind of great technology in a wood cabinet with decoration panels (I find the idea awesome) to attract certain kind of people
AND THEN:
they equip it with a keyboard with click action to simulate the touch of a harpsichord but WHAT HAPPENS BEFORE YOU FEEL THIS CLICK???
exactly: You feel plastic and you feel keys that are not the size you expect them to be on a harpsichord.
I read parts of a very famous (german language) book on harpsichord playing technique summing up various authotitative sources (Couperin, Scarlatti, Bach,…). FIngering and playing technique, therefore also the sound of a baroque piece strongly depend on the size of a key. Playing the harpsichord asks for a technique that is entirely different from playing the piano (much less use of arms, much less moving of the body, mainly the fingers move). Therefore as a pianist you will have to accustom to more than click action…
So in the end they wanted to build the perfect electronic harpsichord and through not respecting these details built a harpsichord piano hybrid. Wooden keyboards are offered as an extra by almost every builder of digital organs. Why not there???
Did somebody in R&D overlook these details???
I guess I would still buy it but I see this as a major disadvantage. They diliberately chose not to offer the real touch and feel!
Follow up:
After some more searching I found this product by a company selling digital organs as their key business:
http://www.hoffrichter-kirchenorgel.de/de/Cembali/DS-30.htm
They also offer a wooden keyboard for it and the measurements of the keys to me look quite realistic.
Click on “Klangbeispiel” to listen to a soud sample.
This one doesn’t offer a flemish and a frensh harpsichord but also 2 8′ and 1 4′ and a lute and really almost looks like the original…
They promise that it imitates the feeling of plocking a string in a ver realisitic way.
What do you think of that?
Josef wrote:
[quote]
…. I´m a music student (organ and conducting) and it´s very nice to have such a instrument near my desktop. This C-30 replaced my Clavinova and for my use it is a great deal because of the “click” - keyboard which is definitvely nearer to organ an harpsichord feeling than the heavy piano keyboard of a digital piano. The sound isn´t really important for me, but it is even very good! I can´t find the “sampling error” Jack mentioned above. The poissibility to change between old temperatures is great.
[/quote]
Josef, the word is “temperament” not “temperature.”
I am sorry for that mistake! Thank you for correcting me Willard!
While a lover of Ancient Music in general and the harpsichord in particular I have been constantly saddened by the use of modern pianos in concert to replace the older instrument. In schools and colleges in particular we seem to be training young ears away from the original sounds and tunings. Now there is a chance instruments such as the C-30 may be able to change this, at least in theory. My students all play recorders from seven years up and deserve a better accompanying sound than they are getting now from the harpsichord setting on my digital piano - is this the solution I am dreaming of? However pretty it looks I do wish there was a way to hide that power cord.
Have any schools or colleges already taken the jump or does electric still rhyme with plastic in institutions? When can we say the digital harpsichord has really come of age? I agree that wooden keys would have been a much more convincing argument but so would genuine ivory and happily we can’t do that any more!
I would prefer the possibility of set my own temperament.
What if I prefer the Vallotti or the Bach/Lehman 1722 temperament?
Modern digital pianos like the Kawai MP8 have this feature and have a lower price (the MP8 have wooden keys).
The C-30 should have this feature.
Plastic is no so bad and the range of sounds are very good, I think.
This is not a replacement for a real harpsichord, but for a stundent without enought money it could be the only way to have an instrument with similar touch and sound of a double manual harpsichord.
Saludos.
Hi everyone, very glad to read your comments.
Do you know how would the internal sounds compare to using Midi In from a computer with better sounds? Like Ivory (to name one I know makes great piano samples). Also, how would this compare vs a stage piano (such as the Kawai MP8) using the same samples? Still a much better option to have the C-30’s keyboard feel?
What do you guys think of the Fortepiano sounds, and the Organ ones? Very nice Celesta.
Check the videos on youtube, very very nice.
Regards,
Ary
Follow-up II
Had a little mail communication with the product manager in Germany (I am from Austria). As most of you might not understand German here a brief summary about what I found out:
- The main goal when developing the instrument was to produce and affordable harpsichord mainly targeted to professionals, students and amateurs, all striving to authtentically reproduce old music. The instrument has tehrefore really been made for people like me, not for people using synthesizers in pop music.
- The black keys were developed from scratch whereas the white keys resemble the keys used in all Roland synthesizers (this was the major issue I had brought up in my previous postings).
- The development of a completely innovative keyboard would have been possible, probably also the use of wood but given the higher cost of this development the instrument would not have been that cheap.
- He even mentioned something I had not found in the brochures I had read which is that touching the key with less force results in a somewhat slower triggering of the chord. Also the use of “koppel” to couple to stops results in a slightly time shift between the 2 chords beeing pulled. A slower release of the key produces a different sound of the plectrum falling back. If thsi is true: Respect!
- Concerning my reproach of also providing the player with a dynamic harpsichord which is of course not a real instrument he quotes Cristofori in his striving for such a dynamic instrument which finally resulted in the invention of the pianoforte. I see this as a very good explanation of their approach allthough I would myself not use it.
- The provided damper pedal can also serve as switch between 2 different registrations which was widely used in harpsichords built in the 20th century and might be quite practical given the fact that the instrument only has a single keyboard. Thus by use of your foot you can quickly change between 2 different registrations - good idea.
- ad Chris Chater: The University of Music in Würzburg /Germany) has recently ordered 3 of them for use in study and concerts. Htey where very happy with the cheap price compared to the good features according to the PM.
- Last but not least a development of more expensive models with probably a better keyboard or 2 keyboards is possible. I guess this will depend on how many they sell of the C 30.
I personally still find the instrument very interesting but would probably wait another year for possible improvements and new models.